Yes, that is exactly it. It makes more sense when you look at it at the level that feminists actually make that decision from: male sexuality is evil and wrong, and female sexuality is empowering and good. All their arguments using other words are actually just post-hoc justifications for this fundamental belief, which is why those arguments are so often contradictory. If a man enjoys looking at a woman in a bikini, it's bad, but if a woman wants to wear a bikini, it's good. Unless she's doing it for a man, then it's bad again. So yes, a woman having sex with a lot of men is empowering, a man having sex with a lot of women is abusive. A man talking about how he likes having sex is disgusting, a woman talking about how she likes having sex is high art.
This is how you can make sense of their attitude on fictional women, too. Fictional woman in a game or comic or movie who's attractive? It must be for men, so it's sexist, even though there's no actual woman to be 'abused', and it may have been a woman who created the character in the first place. Actual woman trying to wear a bikini to work at the office or something? That's empowering and good. It all falls into place when you just realize what their actual thought process is.
Sex-positive feminists view the men they have sex with and want to have sex with the same way they view their garbagemen. They may do the women a service they need and want, but they still view them as disgusting vermin that are beneath them.
It's kind of like how hearing the word "nigger" will literally kill a black person but they use the word more frequently than any other word in the English language.
It's not about what's being said, it's about who has the power to say it.
I’m confused. It’s bad if men look at women or enjoy women being slutty but if a woman is slutty and vulgar that’s empowering?
Yes, that is exactly it. It makes more sense when you look at it at the level that feminists actually make that decision from: male sexuality is evil and wrong, and female sexuality is empowering and good. All their arguments using other words are actually just post-hoc justifications for this fundamental belief, which is why those arguments are so often contradictory. If a man enjoys looking at a woman in a bikini, it's bad, but if a woman wants to wear a bikini, it's good. Unless she's doing it for a man, then it's bad again. So yes, a woman having sex with a lot of men is empowering, a man having sex with a lot of women is abusive. A man talking about how he likes having sex is disgusting, a woman talking about how she likes having sex is high art.
This is how you can make sense of their attitude on fictional women, too. Fictional woman in a game or comic or movie who's attractive? It must be for men, so it's sexist, even though there's no actual woman to be 'abused', and it may have been a woman who created the character in the first place. Actual woman trying to wear a bikini to work at the office or something? That's empowering and good. It all falls into place when you just realize what their actual thought process is.
That is so confusing but enlightening at the same time. I shall continue my search for a wife and hopefully she will be like June Cleaver lol.
Sex-positive feminists view the men they have sex with and want to have sex with the same way they view their garbagemen. They may do the women a service they need and want, but they still view them as disgusting vermin that are beneath them.
It's kind of like how hearing the word "nigger" will literally kill a black person but they use the word more frequently than any other word in the English language.
It's not about what's being said, it's about who has the power to say it.